Some stories can
affect people emotionally, but once in a while a story can call a
person to escape to it. The Lord of the Rings is an enchanting
story with masterful use of setting and sensational characters that
engages readers and can move them to experience life in a deeper way.
As a child, J.R.R. Tolkien lived in Africa until his father passed
away. Then his mother moved them to England. Mrs. Tolkien made certain
that her children learned literature and languages. It was probably
due somewhat to his mother’s influence that Tolkien became who he was:
an author and a linguist (Corday).

Tolkien had a special
interest in "obscure" languages, even to the point of creating his
own. He called it High-Elven and often in his stories he used the
language. Tolkien also invented an entire world called Middle Earth
where The Lord of the Rings takes place. Because he had
invented this world it had to bow to his will and rules. He was an
accomplished linguist and this greatly helped his ability to vividly
portray and create in the reader’s mind Middle Earth, a place that no
person has ever been (Corday).

Charters defines
setting as "the place and time of the story." Also according to
Charters, "When the writer locates the narrative in a physical
setting, the reader is moved along step by step toward acceptance of
the fiction" (Charters 1008).

Tolkien’s setting
gives the reader a sense of goodness or malevolence. Unlike an
environment that is removed from the work, Tolkien’s setting sometimes
is the story. Possibly the setting could even tell the story if there
were no characters. For example, in the house of Elrond of the elves,
Frodo's experience is defined by the setting. "He [Frodo] found his
friends sitting in a porch on the side of the house looking east.
Shadows had fallen in the valley below, but there was still a light
on the faces of the mountains far above. The air was warm. The sound
of running and falling water was loud, and the evening was filled with
a faint scent of trees and flowers, as if summer still lingered in
Elrond’s gardens (220).

This describes a
peaceful place that is not quite reality. The rest of the world is
moving into winter, but Elrond’s gardens haven’t realized that yet.
Next, is another example of how Tolkien uses setting to create a
picture that could not be obtained by just explaining the scenery.
Tolkien is able to bring a place to life with words. We can see this
when the Fellowship winds up going through the Mines of Moria.

The Company spent
that night in the great cavernous hall, huddled close together in a
corner to escape the draught: there seemed to be a steady inflow of
chill air through the eastern archway. All about them as they lay
hung the darkness, hollow and immense, and they were oppressed by
the loneliness and vastness of the dolven halls and endlessly
branching stairs and passages. The wildest imaginings that dark
rumor had ever suggested to the hobbits fell altogether short of the
actual dread and wonder of Moria (307).

This description is
one of dread and fear, but like the experience at Elrond’s house, it
is filled with word pictures. It tells the reader that this place is
terrible and that some evil is afoot.

Of course Tolkien
received criticism as all writers do. For instance, Burton Raffel
takes the opinion that "his [Tolkien's] descriptions often fail to
create ‘sense impressions’ needed to make language ‘more deeply felt
and more deeply worked." Raffel also claimed that "Tolkien’s nature
descriptions are frequently somewhat overwrought..." (20).

Still, I maintain
that Tolkien’s extraordinary ability to paint a picture with words
takes the reader into a place they’ve never been and still manages to
keep them following the story. The characters that Tolkien artfully
created, accent the setting and bring them further to life. This is an
attribute to a great setting. Charters explains that "setting must
also have a dramatic use. It must be shown, or at least felt, to
affect character or plot" (Charters 1008). All through The Lord
of the Rings the setting is imposing feelings onto the characters
(e.g. fear, dread, peacefulness).

Charters describes
characters in literature as "the people who make something happen or
produce an effect," and explains that the "characters must come alive"
(Charters 1006-1007). Tolkien received criticism on his characters by
Raffel as well. Raffel feels that there is "too little meaningful
truth about human reality and our own existences in Tolkien’s
characters." Kathryn Crabbe seems to disagree with this
statement. In her efforts to describe the characters as heroic she
also shows us they have some very modern human characteristics. Crabbe
says that Frodo is "neither stronger than most men, nor braver than
most...He is selfless in his love for his companions." If there
is not enough "meaningful truth about human reality" in Tolkien’s
writing, then maybe it is because he portrays a picture of ordinary
people at their best. The heroes in The Lord of the Rings do
not succumb to evil. They do not inadvertently get caught doing good.
They are selfless. Isn’t this exactly humanity at its best?

Middle Earth is a
place where the spirituality of a person is closely connected to the
reality of the person. Tolkien’s characters are not mere people. Each
has a position and job in the universe as well, something to make them
heroic and larger than life-right down to Sam whose purpose it would
seem is to guard and protect his "master". This is evident throughout
the books but especially at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring
when Sam, now understanding just what might lie ahead, insists on
going with Frodo (397). The characters show that not just anyone is
able to complete this quest. It requires a specific person for each
job. For example, there is a reason that Tom Bombadil cannot take the
Ring even though he is impervious to its power (259). Fate has chosen
Frodo. In so doing Tolkien creates a story that even the average
person can relate to. It propels people to see the possibilities of
greatness amongst the commoners and restores our hope in the great
ones. Almost anyone can find at least one hero among the fellowship.

One of the things
that makes The Lord of the Rings so compelling is the way the
setting and characters work together to produce the ultimate affect.
The characters make the setting even more potent. As the external
setting influences each character the reader sees how the struggle
becomes internal. We are led to believe that the characters are
closely connected to the earth. The diversity of the setting and
characters simply propels us to see the uniqueness of each place.
Where a group of caves might give us one thought, hearing Gimli
discuss the majesty of his cave experience helps us to appreciate the
diversity of the group and to see it through a cave dwellers eyes.
"These are not holes," said Gimli. "This is the great realm and city
of the Dwarrowdelf. And of old it was not darksome, but full of light
and splendour, as is still remembered in our songs"(307).

The Lord of the Rings
is
essentially a story about the struggle of good verses evil. The
setting helps the story personify the difficulties the characters
face. The characters go through the trials and share their feelings of
fear and triumph with us. The two work together to make an excellent
portrayal of external and internal struggles that yield an otherwise
impossible effect.

Works Cited

Charters, Ann, ed.
The Story and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction.
Compact 6th ed.

To be
in conflict with traditional society’s beliefs is difficult for many
to do; however, author Kate Chopin fights that battle to bring
readers some of the most thought provoking literature that a person
can get their hands on. Using to her advantage conventions of
narrative stories such as character development, plot control, and
irony, she is able to bring the reader into a world of emotions that
society would scoff at. Kate Chopin demonstrates her incredible
literary talent in “The Story of an Hour” by interconnecting the
plot and character development, with her use of thought-provoking
vocabulary and narrative irony.

Kate
Chopin’s literary talent would have never been so strongly founded
if it was not for the circumstances surrounding her life and
upbringing. Her father died when she was only four years old, which
left her mother and grandmother to raise, and shape her desires and
ideologies (Charters 156). Having been raised primarily by strong
willed feminine role models, Chopin developed a taste for more of an
unconventional role for women in society. In her home town of St.
Louis, she became know as the town’s “Littlest Rebel” (Davis). She
was widowed and left with six children to bring up on her own
(Charters 156). This situation developed more of her strong will to
write about the passion and strength that women have. Much of her
writing portrays women in their relations with men, children and
their own sexuality (Charters 156). Her writing is classified in
the literary movement know as Realism. The Realism movement took
place in the 19th century (Agatucci 4). Realism is based
on everyday events, ‘slice of life’ stories that depict ordinary
people dealing with society and its forces on living (Agatucci 3).
Realistic writing is characterized with everyday events, social
controversy, and protagonist/antagonist interactions (Agatucci 3).
There is often and ironic undertone to Realism, as is evident in
“The Story of an Hour” (Agatucci 3). All of the characteristics of
the Realism movement mentioned are active in this story. An example
of Realism in “The Story of an Hour” is evident when Mrs. Mallard’s
sister reveals to her the tragic news: “It was her sister Josephine
who told her, in broken sentences; veiled hints that revealed in
half concealing (Chopin 157).” This brings out the slice of life
quality of Realism because it is a display of how most people would
break the news of a shocking death. Chopin enjoyed life and
believed that real fiction was and is life (Chopin 861). Although
she felt like a literary outcast, her frankness and honest look at
women and their emotions is what makes “The Story of an Hour” and
her other works literary jewels in our society today.

Chopin
does a great job at integrating two of the conventions of narrative
fiction, plot and character development. The plot of a story is “the
sequence of events in a story and their relation to one another as
they develop and usually resolve a conflict (Charters2 1003).”
Within the plot of narrative stories there is an exposition, rise to
action, climax, and a fall from action. The character development
is the other convention that enables Chopin to write this thought
provoking story. Character is “what stays with you after you have
finished reading it. The action of the plot is performed by the
characters in the story, the people who make something happen or
produce an effect” (Charters2 1006). Chopin uses her character
development to enhance the plot in order to bring the reader closer
to the emotions of the story. In ‘The Story of an Hour” both of
these elements are vitally interconnected to each other.

The
plot itself is taking place primarily in the mind of Mrs. Mallard,
which makes imperative that the reader understands her personality
and where thoughts are derived from. First Mrs. Mallard is described
as having heart trouble, and being a tender woman (Chopin 157). This
is important to the plot because it explains why her sister took
great care to break the news to her. She is also described as being
“young, with a fair, calm face, whose lines bespoke repression and
even a certain strength” (Chopin 157). This is a key piece of
information in understanding why she grieves only momentarily.
According to Webster’s Dictionary repression means: “to
prevent the natural or normal expression, activity or development
of; a process by which unacceptable desires or impulses are excluded
from consciousness and left to operate in the unconscious” (Webster
527). Mrs. Mallard’s marriage did not allow her to express herself
through any venue of release with the exception of her unconscious.
She was never allowed to be ‘normal’ with her emotions or, to show
or use her true strength, but instead had to suppress them. One can
also see that in the plot, Mrs. Mallard resists the liberation she
feels at first because of her characteristic trait of being weak,
and is unable or powerless to resist them (Chopin 157). As the
feeling of freedom sets in her mind she begins to describe herself
as a “goddess of Victory” (Chopin 158). A goddess is a “female of
exceptional charm beauty, or grace” (Webster 294). Mrs. Mallard
began, for the first time in her marriage, to feel beautiful and
charming in light of her victory over the battle of wills that she
had been oppressed by. In the story she gets her first chance to
show off her new found strength and beauty when she lets her sister
in to see the “triumph in her eyes” (Chopin 158). The mix of
character development and plot is not only evident in the case of
main character, but is also found briefly in the case if Mr.
Mallard. Chopin writes “There would be no powerful will bending hers
in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have
a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature. A kind
intention or a cruel intention made the act seem no less a crime…”
(Chopin 158). This is the only glimpse that the reader gets into
Bentley Mallard’s character; however there is much revealed through
this passage. He was controlling, forcing his will on her. He was
powerful (in contrast to her being powerless) and blind to the fact
that he was hurting his wife. The other minor characters are left to
the imagination of the reader because they do not play major roles
within the plot.

A
fundamental characteristic of Realism is its use of irony. Chopin
plays with irony to bring surprise to the climax, as well as enhance
the depth of the story. Sara Davis has this to say: “The Story of an
Hour” “turns on a series of artful modulated ironies that culminate
in a somewhat contrived ending” (Davis). There are several examples
of this, first off that of Brentley’s friend Richard takes the time
to confirm his name with a second telegram, and then at the end of
the story it turns out that he is not even involved in the accident
(Chopin 157). Another example of irony is this: “Her pulse beat
fast, and then the coursing blood warmed and relaxed every inch of
her body” (Chopin 158). In this sentence it is ironic that it was
blood, the symbolic representation of life, that was fueling her,
and then at the end her life ceases. Another ironic point is made
within Mrs. Mallard’s thought process: “She breathed a quick prayer
that life might be long. It was only yesterday she had thought with
a shudder that life might be long” (Chopin 158).Her prayer was
answered, and when she found out she immediately had a fatal heart
attack. In addition to this irony of life and death, the reader is
faced with yet another and maybe the strongest use of irony in this
short story, and that is the use of the word ‘joy’. It is first used
in Mrs. Mallard’s thoughts as a “monstrous joy” of being free from
bondage, and tasting the elixir of life that is now so precious to
her (Chopin 158). Secondly it is used by the doctors in the last
line who naively state that she died “of heart disease—of joy that
kills” (Chopin 158). It is ironic that it was not joy of seeing Mr.
Mallard alive that killed her, but that of the terrible loss that
she would never feel the monstrous joy she had felt before. Kate
Chopin did produce an excellent example of Realism literature with
her use of irony in this story.

Chopin does not allow her use of irony as her only tool to enhance
the dynamics of “The Story of an Hour”. She also incorporates a
variety of tools such as metaphors, narrative style, and thought
provoking vocabulary that bring this story to life. Mrs. Mallard is
described as having heart trouble (Chopin 157). One could argue that
her ‘heart trouble’ was not that of a physical condition, but of an
emotional and psychological condition derived from such a difficult
marriage. Chopin also uses a wide array of descriptive words to
bring to life the feelings that Mrs. Mallard is having about the
death of her husband. Examples of this are seen throughout the text:
“new spring life” “delicious breath of air” “blue sky showing
through the clouds” “drinking in a very elixir of life” “summer
days” etc. (Chopin 157-158). Chopin also uses the metaphor of an
open window that she sits Mrs. Mallard in front of during the rise
of the plot. The window is not just part of the setting, but a
window into the heart and mind of the main character. It was her
access to new life, new excitement, and new hopes of the coming
years without Brently’s overpowering will on her. Jennifer Hicks
brings out another point of narrative eloquence by stating that
Chopin “elaborates upon this when the narrator says that Mrs.
Mallard “would have no one follow her.” While the implication is
that she would have no one follow her to her room, the reader
wonders in hindsight whether Mrs. Mallard might have meant also that
she would have no one interfere with her new life again” (Hicks).
Kate Chopin used all of these tools to her advantage to bring the
world a controversial look at a woman’s emotions.

It
took many years after this story was written for its popularity to
grow into what it is today. In “The Story of an Hour” Kate Chopin
interconnects the plot, characters, irony, and narrative eloquence
to produce a literary product that is arguably priceless in our
society today. Fred Lewis Patte says in “A History of American
Literature” that since 1870 the strength of Chopin’s work come from
“what may be described as a native aptitude for narration amounting
almost to genius” (Hicks). Readers of the future look forward to
see if her ‘genius’ in this work will stand the test of time.

Charters, Ann. “The Elements of Fiction.” The Story and its
Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed Ann Charters.
Compact 6th ed. Boston: Bedford, St. Martin’s, 2003.
1003-1015.

Chopin, Kate. “The Story of an Hour.” [First published 1894] Rpt.
The Story and its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed
Ann Charters. Compact 6th ed. Boston: Bedford, St.
Martin’s, 2003. 157-158.

Chopin, Kate. “How I stumbled upon Maupassant.” [1896]. Rpt. The
Story and its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed Ann
Charters. Compact 6th ed. Boston: Bedford, St. Martin’s,
2003. 861-862.

One of the sweet comforts in life is curling up in a favorite chair
with a short story that will carry us away from our everyday lives
for an hour or two. On rare occasions, we find a tale that mirrors
real life in such a way that we are strangely comforted by the
normalcy reflected in the words. A perfect example of a story about
ordinary life that will soothe the soul in search for some insight
on understanding human behavior is Anton Chekhov’s “The Lady with
the Little Dog.” This piece is definitive of the literary period of
realism during the late nineteenth century that was influenced by
this brilliant writer and others such as Guy de Maupassant and Kate
Chopin. This style of writing has such a mass appeal because the
“characters in [these] novels (and in short stories) wear
recognizable social masks and reflect an everyday reality” (Charters
997). In his simple anecdote of a chance meeting between a
middle-aged, chauvinistic, repeat-offender adulterer, unhappily
married man, and a young, naïve, in-search-of-something-new, married
woman, Chekhov paints a picture that gives a startling
representation of how these two characters are influenced by the
settings in which their chronicle takes place, especially with the
budding of their relationship.

The
narrative takes place in Yalta, a vacation spot for Eastern
Europeans and Russians on the northern coast of the Black Sea. We
are given a brief description of the main character, Gurov, who is a
man that describes his wife as a woman “none too bright,
narrow-minded, graceless,” (Chekhov 144) and has used these human
imperfections as reasons to be unfaithful. We learn only minute
details about his children and his employment, with more emphasis
being given to his views on women, “an inferior race” (Chekhov 144),
which are no doubt due to the sour experiences he has had in his
extramarital affairs. We can use this information and the fact that
Yalta is a place where one would go to search out “a quick, fleeting
liaison” (Chekhov 144) to assess that this man is in Yalta looking
for just that. As soon as Gurov gains sight of his prospective
candidate and makes first contact with “the lady with the little
dog” (Chekhov 144), the scenery begins to take shape and the setting
is cheerful and airy, full of beautiful colors and tranquil light.
After becoming acquainted, Anna and Gurov “strolled and talked of
how strange the light was on the sea; the water was of a lilac
color, so soft and warm, and over it the moon cast a golden strip”
(Chekhov 145). Later, when he is alone in his hotel room, Gurov
reflects on “her slender, weak neck, her beautiful gray eyes”
(Chekhov 145) and his thoughts reveal that he has determined this
young, vulnerable woman to be an ideal contender for another one of
his many affairs that he just can’t help becoming involved in. As
the story unfolds, we see how the color gray is an integral
component in the sort of comfortable, yet, unresolved feeling that
the relationship between Gurov and Anna emanates.

When things
are heating up between the two lonely travelers, so is the weather,
which is “stuffy, but outside the dust flew in whirls” (Chekhov 146)
and their thirst is unrelenting no matter what they eat or drink to
quench it. “There was no escape” (Chekhov 146), seemingly, from the
desire for one another that is beginning to blossom. On this
particular evening, the couple makes way for the jetty to watch the
incoming ship. A crowd of people has gathered with many bouquets of
flowers to greet arrivals. The churning ocean echoes the intensity
of their attraction for each other, along with the mess of people
surrounding them and Anna’s display of uneasiness and
absentmindedness. As the crowd thins out, the mood is calm and
dark; the air is full of the lingering scents of the flowers that
are long gone with the people and commotion. This becomes the
optimal milieu for the couple to surrender to their desires, free
from the probing stares of the public.

Back in the
hotel room, where it is again “stuffy” (Chekhov 146), Gurov is
reminded of his past experiences in many similar situations, and it
seems as though he may be fighting off the urge to run away from
this potentially, if not, inevitably, disastrous scene. “Her
features drooped and faded, and her hair hung down sadly on both
sides of her face, she sat pondering in a dejected pose, like the
sinful woman in a old painting” (Chekhov 147). Anna’s
defenselessness is unappealing to Gurov, yet he is detached from his
emotions in such a way that he will not even consider the prospect
of the damage he could cause to this woman. Regardless of his
indifference, there is an inkling of the feelings he is already
beginning to have as he considers “the solitary candle burning on
the table barely lit up her face, but it was clear that her heart
was uneasy”(Chekhov147). The change from dark to light signals
Gurov really does care for this woman and is aware of his changing
feelings, but he is far from learning to accept this.

Once the
relationship is consummated and Gurov is able to console Anna, the
lightheartedness returns to the scene, as if a dark cloud has been
lifted, and the two take off on an outing to Oreanda. “The leaves
of the trees did not stir, cicadas called, and the monotonous, dull
noise of the sea, coming from below, spoke of the peace, of the
eternal sleep that awaits us” (Chekhov 148). It is at this point
when the reality of what they have done sets in and the landscape
begins to take on a resolute quality, ostensibly validating the
intricate feeling the two are experiencing together. They are
reminded of the fact that life goes on regardless of any mistakes
and “if you thought of it, everything was beautiful in this world,
everything except for what we ourselves think and do when we forget
the higher goals of being and our human dignity” (Chekhov 148). As
Gurov considers the “unceasing movement of life on earth” (Chekhov
148), the light changes and “in the glow of early dawn” (Chekhov
148) the feeling is gray and mystical, uncomplicated and convoluted
all at the same time.

When Anna
and Gurov have decidedly accepted their fate together, the
relationship swings into full force and the “outings were
successful, their impressions each time were beautiful, majestic”
(Chekhov 148). And then “fate itself” (Chekhov 148) makes a
well-anticipated appearance, and the lovers must part, most likely
forever, “and a moment later the noise could no longer be heard, as
if everything were conspiring on purpose to put a speedy end to this
sweet oblivion, this madness” (Chekhov 149). With the brisk winds
of fall, Gurov is left alone on the train platform to contemplate
his worthiness of the nature of the feelings this woman has for him,
“he had appeared to her not as he was in reality, and therefore he
had involuntarily deceived her…” (Chekhov 149).

Anton
Chekhov is a master of portraying the complexities of the human
condition and the difficulties we all have with communication, both
inward and outward. The settings are artfully represented by
imagery that evokes real emotions in the reader who has gazed upon
the landscape searching for answers to life’s obstacles. Richard
Ford describes Chekhov as “a writer for adults, his work becoming
useful and also beautiful by attracting attention to mature
feelings, to complicated human responses and small issues of moral
choice within large, overarching dilemmas” (Ford 868). There are
relationships in life that will change the very way in which we view
our surrounds and ourselves, and sometimes living vicariously
through another’s experience will inflict the same realizations.
“The Lady with the Little Dog” will give any reflective reader a
delicious taste of life in perpetual motion, the ongoing cycle of
learning to live and accepting being human.

Works Cited

Charters, Ann. “Appendix 2: A Brief
History of the Short Story.”The Story and Its Writer: An
Introduction
to Short Fiction. Compact 6th
ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003. 995-1002.

“Life…is
composed of the most unpredictable, disparate, and contradictory
elements,” according to Guy de Maupassant. “It is brutal,
inconsequential, and disconnected, full of inexplicable, illogical
catastrophes” (“The Writer’s Goal" 897). Utterly to the point with
his words, Guy de Maupassant’s fame as a writer stemmed from his
“direct and simple way” of telling readers what he observed (Chopin
861). His short story, “The Necklace,” is no exception. “The
Necklace” is evidence of the literary realism that dominated
literature during the 19th century. Cora Agatucci, a
professor of Humanities, states that the subjects of literature
during this time period revolved around “everyday events, lives,
[and the] relationships of middle/lower class people” (Agatucci
2003). In “The Necklace,” Maupassant describes an unhappy woman,
born to a poor family and married to a poor husband, who suffers
“ceaselessly” from her lower-class lifestyle, “[…] feeling herself
born for all the delicacies and all the luxuries” (Maupassant
524). Through the unfolding of the plot and the exquisite
characterization of Mathilde and her husband, Maupassant offers
readers a dramatic account of what could happen when a person is not
satisfied with her place in life.

Ann
Charters defines plot as “the sequence of events in a story and
their relation to one another as they develop and usually resolve a
conflict” (Charters1003). According to Charters, there are
five major parts of a plot. The exposition explains the characters,
the time period, and the present situation; the rising action
introduces a major complication, with smaller conflicts occurring
along the way; the climax, or the dramatic

Samuel 2

turning point in the
action of the story; the falling action, which helps wrap up the
major complication; and finally, the conclusion of the story
(Charters 1004-1005).

Plot plays
a vital role in “The Necklace,” particularly the exposition.
Approximately one page is devoted entirely to Mathilde’s
description, a description of both her physical appearance as well
as her mentality, giving the readers a crystal clear picture of the
main character and the reasons behind her depression. Mathilde
“dressed plainly because she could not dress well, but she was as
unhappy as though she had really fallen from her proper station,”
undoubtedly a station of wealth and prosperity in her mind.
Suffering “from the poverty of her dwelling,” Mathilde often dreamt
of “silent antechambers hung with Oriental tapestry, lit by tall
bronze candelabra” when her own drab furniture and dreary walls
angered her to look at them (Maupassant 524). The exposition paints
Mathilde as a woman who feels she’s been dealt a poor hand in life,
a woman desiring riches far beyond her grasp, which foreshadows the
events to come later in the plot.

“The
action of the plot is performed by the characters in the
story, the people who make something happen or produce an effect”
(Charters 1006). Without the characters, the plot would be
meaningless because the characters bring the plot to life. Charters
also explains that characters can be one of two types: dynamic or
static. A static character does not change throughout the story; he
or she just stays the same, while a dynamic character is often
described as “round” and often changes throughout the course of the
story (Charters 1007). The way an author chooses to develop a
character affects the entire story, particularly the climax. If a
character developed as a calm and level headed

Samuel 3

person, he or she will
react wisely to conflicts or emotional turning points; however, if a
character is developed as greedy and self absorbed, the climax of
the story will cause the character to make irrational choices in the
face of conflict, as Mathilde, the dynamic main character of “The
Necklace” illustrates.

Mathilde’s
character is consistently unhappy with her own life and her own
possessions, always longing for more than what she has. When her
husband brings home the invitation to the ball, hoping his wife will
be thrilled at the chance to attend such an exclusive gathering, she
instead “threw the invitation on the table with disdain,” because
she had nothing to wear. At her husband’s suggestion of wearing her
theater dress, she simply cries with grief. When the dress dilemma
is resolved, Mathilde is “sad, uneasy, [and] anxious” (Maupassant
525). Her lack of fine jewelry and gems makes her feel that she
“should almost rather not go at all” (Maupassant 526). Clearly,
Mathilde’s character is one with an insatiable greed for what she
does not have.

Later in
the story, after the precious necklace has been lost, Mathilde’s
character appears to change, taking on the role of a poor woman with
“heroism.” As she is forced to scrub dishes, wash laundry, and
bargain with their “miserable” money, the reader would assume
Mathilde has been humbled by her greed and the price she paid for
insisting on wearing the diamond necklace. The reader questions the
extent of Mathilde’s transformation when Mathilde sits at her window
and ponders the evening of the ball, remembering her beauty and the
attention she received.

Contrary
to Mathilde is her husband, M. Loisel, a character who remains
static throughout the course of “The Necklace.” M. Loisel seems
happy with the small things

Samuel 4

in life, desiring only
please his wife. When he sits down to a supper of soup, he
exclaims, “Ah, the good pot-au-feu! I don’t know anything
better than that” (Maupassant 524). Meanwhile, Mathilde is
picturing food she feels she is worthy of, like “the pink flesh of a
trout or the wings of a quail” (Maupassant 524). M. Loisel does
look his patience once with his wife, saying to her, “How stupid you
are!” (Maupassant 526) when she is upset about her lack of jewelry.
Other than that small episode, M. Loisel remains fairly consistent
throughout the length of the story.

The
construction of the plot, such as the dramatic climax when Mathilde
realizes she has lost the necklace, combined with the shaping of the
two main characters, Mathilde and her husband, force the reader to
realize the unspoken theme of the story. Mathilde’s envy of other
people’s possessions leads to the eventual demise of her life, while
her husband’s contentment with what he has allows him to remain
essentially unchanged, illustrates the theme running throughout the
story, which is the importance of being satisfied with who you are
and what you have, as well as the importance of not wanting or
envying what other’s have. This theme becomes obvious when, in the
exposition, Mathilde’s perspective on her life makes her seem poor
and underprivileged; yet, when the Loisels are forced to make
drastic changes in their way of life, such as firing their maid and
moving to more economical lodging, the reader realizes the poverty
Mathilde suffers from is not poverty at all compared to the life
they must lead after they are forced to replace the diamond
necklace.

Without a
strong plot that envelops the reader in the ongoing action, a story
is not as powerful or effective; without good characterization of
the main characters, there is no

Samuel 5

mechanism for the plot
to unfold. If there is not an effective plot with identifiable
characters, the theme of any story is lost to the reader, so clearly
the three go hand in hand with each other. Maupassant’s ability to
communicate facts and descriptions, leaving the emotional
interpretation for the reader, is what he’s known for. In fact,
this ability makes the reader feel as though Maupassant is telling
the story for their ears and hearts only. Kate Chopin eloquently
wrote, “I like to cherish the delusion that he has spoken to no one
else so directly, so intimately as he does to me” (Chopin 862).

There is
little doubt that J.R.R. Tolkien has become, in his short reign
within literary fiction, nothing short of legendary. His stories,
while only recently presented to the world, have ensnared and
enthralled thousands of readers around the world. While many
“cultured” critics still scoff at this work, the effect Tolkien has
had on this world is nearly as profound as the control he had over
Middle Earth in his novels. Tolkien, while certainly a master of
all elements of fiction, displayed unquestionable proficiency in the
areas of character and setting.

Ann
Charters defines character simply as, “any person who plays a part
in a narrative” (Charters 1045). Charters also defines flat
characters as those which are, “simple, one-dimensional,
unsurprising, and usually unchanging,” and round characters as those
who are, “complex, full, described in detail, often contradictory,
and usually dynamic,” or changing (Charters 1045). The interesting
part of Tolkien’s work is that there are absolutely no flat
characters. The world of Middle Earth is changing and all the
creatures within it change as well. Tolkien’s ability to control
the fates of the hundreds of characters in his novels may be the
single most important aspect of his novels. It is with these
characters that readers identify, and this identification moves the
readers from a detached, on-looking relationship to an involved,
personal experience within the world Tolkien creates.

His
development of characters seems to focus on one main character at a
time, shifting from one to another. Specifically, Tolkien shifts
from Bilbo to Frodo Baggins. In developing those characters, much
is learned about the world and characters around them. In the first
chapter of Tolkien’s, “The Fellowship of the Ring,” Tolkien
introduces Bilbo Baggins and seemingly focuses entirely on him. An
observant reader will however notice that they are given insight
into the character of dozens of characters. For instance, Ham
Gamgee, “The old Gaffer,” tells other hobbits, “Elves and
Dragons! I says to him. Cabbages and potatoes are better for
me and you” (Tolkien 24). When no one objects to this
statement, readers are given insight into the character of all
hobbits. While Ham Gamgee may play only a small part in the rest of
this story, readers also learn about the background of Sam Gamgee
through this and other quotes from his father. It is this
background that gives Tolkien’s characters the depths into which
readers may delve. By telling us not only what the character is
like and how they change throughout the story, but also why and how
they became who they are, Tolkien gives his readers a sense of
personal attachment, as if they really know the characters in the
story.

Tolkien,
while introducing minor parts, never fails to develop their
character. Even Radagast the Brown, a wizard who is mentioned
briefly on no more than two occasions is no exception to this rule.
Tolkien tells his readers where Radagast used to dwell and explains
his relationship with Gandalf, the only character with whom Radagast
interacts (Tolkien 250). Glorfindel, the Elf-Lord who’s' horse
Frodo rides across the ford to Elrond, is a well developed character
as Gandalf explains his nature and background to Frodo after their
arrival in the House of Elrond at Rivendell (Tolkien 217-218).
Through these descriptions of all the characters in his novels,
Tolkien provides an emotional connection with Middle Earth and makes
the story seem less fiction and more like a dream in which readers
are completely immersed.

This
immersion, while an exceptional accomplishment, is only one part of
what brings readers into Tolkien’s world. The characterization
makes readers feel as if they actually know the creatures in the
story, while the setting makes readers feel as if they are walking
alongside these characters on their journey through Middle Earth.
When these two are combined, readers feel as if they become an
integral part of the story.

In
her essay, “Master of Middle Earth,” Alina Corday stated that
Tolkien’s, “penchant for perfectionism slowed his progress mightily”
while writing his novels (Corday 3). She also mentions that Tolkien
found it necessary to learn how to stew a rabbit before including
such an event in his novel (Corday 3). This perfectionism is
evidenced greatly in his development of the setting. After the
prologue and before the first chapter, Tolkien includes a detailed
map of The Shire. At the end of the novel, he includes six
additional maps, all of which are drawn in great detail and depict
parts of the world he has created. Charters defined setting as,
“The place and time in which a story’s action takes place” (Charters
1051). This simple definition is certainly fulfilled in nothing
more than the maps and, perhaps, a dozen pages of the novel.
Charters does not, however, end her definition there. She goes on
to state that setting includes, “the culture and ways of life of the
characters and the shared beliefs and assumptions that guide their
lives” (Charters 1051). Tolkien even goes so far as to explain what
hobbits smoke in pipes, the history behind it, and where the best
“pipe weed” is grown (Tolkien 7-9).

As the
story progresses, detailed descriptions are given of every area
through which the story takes us. In fact, Tolkien often presents
background on parts of the setting before they are formally
introduced to his readers. For instance, The Old Forest through
which the Hobbits pass upon leaving The Shire is discussed in detail
before the party even decides to travel through it. It is described
as a dark, treacherous place, and is obviously a place the Hobbits
fear (Tolkien 104-109). Because they have this background, readers
are able to experience the feelings of apprehension, surprise, and
wonder in the same way the characters experience them.

In his
obsession with perfection, Tolkien created an entirely new world,
complete with customs, languages, races, songs, and countries. He
also created a plethora of individuals through which his story is
carried out and with which his readers identify. While he created
this world and everything in it, he could not stray from the
characters and lands he created. Because of this, he had little
control over the events once he set them in motion. Tolkien, like
the Lord of the Rings in the novel, had little control over the
actions that took place. He could only set obstacles and helping
hands before the characters and allow them to play out the story as
they would, as if they were, in fact, real people in a real world
that began in one man’s mind and now exists in the minds and hearts
of thousands of readers throughout the world.

Works Cited

Charters, Ann.
“Appendix 5: Glossary of Literary Terms.” The Story and its
Writer: An
Introduction to Short
Fiction. Compact 6th ed. Boston: Belford/St. Martin’s
2003. 1044-1053.

The Mystery of the
Mastery

Much of life
results from choices we make. How we meet every circumstance, and also
how we allow those circumstances to affect us dictates our life. In
Anton Chekhov’s “The Lady With the Little Dog," we are given a chance to
take a look inside two characters not unlike ourselves. As we are given
insight into these two people, their character and nature unfolds,
presenting us with people we can relate to. Even if we fail to grasp
the fullness of a feeling or circumstance, we are still touched on our
own level, evidencing the brilliance of Chekhov’s writing.

In the
exposition of the story, Chekhov immediately delves into his character
generation, introducing us to both Anna Sergeevna and Dmitri Gurov, the
main players in the story. He also gives us a physical description of
Anna, as well as a beginning presentation of Dmitri’s character. Of
Anna, Chekhov writes, “…a young woman, not very tall, blond, in a beret,
walking along the embankment; behind her ran a white spitz” (Chekhov
144). Of Dmitri he comments, “Gurov, who had already spent two weeks in
Yalta…began to take an interest in new faces” (Chekhov 144). Chekhov
immediately offers a feel for how each character will shape up to be,
and presents a chance for us (the reader) to attach ourselves to these
perhaps not-so-unique individuals. Without further ado, Chekhov
expounds on his initial description of Dmitri through the next five
paragraphs. We learn that he is almost forty, has three children and a
wife, but that he is not happy at home. He married early, and is not in
love with his wife. He outwardly proclaims extreme chauvinism towards
women, but we learn that “in the company of men he was bored, ill at
ease, with them he was taciturn and cold, but when he was among women,
he felt himself free and knew what to talk about with them and how to
behave; and he was at ease even being silent with them” (Chekhov 144).
Through this description, Dmitri gains a soul and personality. He
becomes a round, developed character with whom we can relate and
identify ourselves. Even if we are not completely like Dmitri, his
“normal” character helps us to identify ourselves with him in some way.

Chekhov’s
ability to define character and produce an effect in the reader is not
limited only to the description and action provided in the story. He
expertly weaves location and setting into the development of theme.
“Setting is essential if the reader is to be given the opportunity to
glimpse a truth about the internal life from the characters and the
plot” (Charters 1008). The story begins in Yalta, obviously in warmer
weather, which sets a happy tone for the exposition. However, once the
couple meets, the weather begins to change. “A week had passed since
they became acquainted. It was Sunday. Inside it was stuffy, but
outside the dust flew in whirls, hats blew off” (Chekhov 146). Chekhov
illustrates how the characters are developing through the change in the
weather. In the beginning, when the relationship is mostly superficial,
the sun is shining, and it’s a nice time for a stroll. However, as the
adulterous relationship continues, the weather become tumultuous,
foreshadowing the turmoil that will soon begin inside both Anna and
Dmitri. After the lovers commit their adulterous deeds, “when they went
out, there was not a soul on the embankment, the town with its cypresses
looked completely dead…” (Chekhov 147), indicating the death inside both
the lovers. There is no turning back at this point, and death may loom
ahead. Through the environment the characters live in, we learn what
they are going through, and understanding of the characters expand beyond mere words and
actions.

The brilliance
of Chekhov’s writing cannot be overstated. In “The Lady with the Little
Dog” there is an untypical depth to the relationship between Anna and
Dmitri. While the plot itself may be little more than that of a soap
opera, the development and depth to which the characters are taken is
far beyond any afternoon television program. As Richard Ford says,
Chekhov “concentrates [his] narrative attentions not on the
conventional hot spots – sex, deceit, and what happens at the end – but
rather, by its precision, pacing, and decisions about what to tell, it
directs our interest toward those flatter terrains of a love affair
where we, being conventional souls, might overlook something important”
(871). Sex, lies, and deceit do take place, but they are all off
stage. Chekhov takes this critical time to develop character, showing
us what is going on inside the souls of the adulterers, rather
than sensationalizing on the outside events that are all too
popular in today’s society (as well as back when the story was written).

Although
Chekhov’s story is filled with complex issues of moral struggle and
turmoil, it is a story we can all relate to. Everyone faces difficult
decisions in life, and Chekhov brings the inner mayhem to light. Focus
upon people rather than events impacts us in ways we cannot even
describe. We are connected to the people in the story as we identify
with the feelings and personalities of these fictional characters.
“Everything that he [Gurov] found important, interesting,
necessary, in which he was sincere and did not deceive himself, which
constituted the core of his life, occurred in secret from others”
(Chekhov 154). We are forced to reflect upon circumstances
in our own lives, and all of life’s little nuances become significant
once we realize that they affect the fiber of our being. Chekhov
attracts “attention to mature feelings, to complicated human dilemmas,
any part of which, were we to encounter them in our complex, headlong
life with others, might evade even sophisticated notice” (Ford 869).
We become more sensitive to human interaction, and begin to empathize
with others, beyond the mere situation, and their deep inner struggles.

Without the
brilliant illustration of Chekhov’s characters, we would miss much of
the meaning of the story. “The importance of being honest with your
feelings” could be a theme in “The Lady with the Little Dog.” If
Chekhov did not produce such dynamic, realistic characters, we might be
insensitive to the true feelings of Anna and Dmitri. This character
development is essential to understanding of the theme. “And only now,
when his head was gray, had he really fallen in love as one ought to –
for the first time in his life” (Chekhov 155). Chekhov tells the
reader, “It’s not too late. ‘Even when [your] head [is] gray’ you can
still find true love.” Once the reader has identified with the
character, they begin to take the practice (and success) of the
character to bear in their own life. The theme is fully digested, and
creates inspiration in the reader to begin their own quest for truth.

Works Cited

Charters, Ann, ed. The Story and Its Writer: An
Introduction to Short Fiction.

Compact 6th ed. Boston:
Bedford-St. Martin’s, 2002.

Chekhov, Anton. “The Lady with the Little Dog.”
Rpt. The Story and Its Writer: An

Kate Chopin’s
“Story of an Hour” tells the tale of an evolution of a character in a
single hour. Chopin accomplishes this by using a specific point of view
and unique plot to carry out her vision. These elements work together to
create a theme that has the greatest impact on the reader.

Ann Charters
defines “point of view” as “the author’s choice of narrator for the
story”(1009). “The Story of an Hour” is told from the viewpoint of a
third-person narrator. This speaker is a “non-participant in the story”
(Charters 1009). Never does the narrator include herself in the plot of
“Hour.” Specifically, this speaker has only “limited omniscience” as
she relates the story. According to Charters, a speaker with limited
omniscience is able to know what is going on in the mind of a single
character, but not have a full understanding of, or chooses not to
reveal to the readers, the minds of all the characters (Charters 1009).
For example, the emotions and thoughts of Mrs. Mallard are fully
described within the story. We see her grief, but also the thoughts of
freedom that begin to come to her mind (Chopin 157-8). Because the narrator
does not show all the aspects of the story, it allows the fact of her
husband being alive to be a surprise (Chopin 158). The narrator,
because he or she is not a member of the story, may be able to be
trusted more by the reader than a person involved directly in the story
(Charters 1010). The narrator is considered more “objective” (Agatucci
4).

The author,
Kate Chopin, was a great admirer of Guy de Maupassant, a writer of the
realist genre (Agatucci 4). Maupassant stated that “The writer’s goal
is to reproduce this illusion of life faithfully…” (Maupassant 898).
Chopin used a point of view in “Story of an Hour” very similar to that
of Maupassant when he wrote “The Necklace.” The author’s factual
account allows a reader to experience this “illusion of life”.
According to Maupassant, a writer should find a new way of looking at a
situation (Charters 523). Chopin, in attempting to imitate the genre
embraced by this author, looked at a situation of the death of a husband
in a unique way. She accomplished this by presenting the true feelings
of a widow and contrasting those feelings with society’s beliefs.
Working in the realistic genre, Chopin presented a more “disillusioned”
view of life (Agatucci 4). Chopin did not portray the accepted norms of
society. She did not state that the wife could not go on without her
husband. By contrast, she viewed her story with a new concept, that of
a wife feeling empowered to go on living because her husband was
no longer alive.

The thoughts
and actions of these characters can be seen in the development of the
plot. Point of view is how a reader is able to look into a story; the
plot is the arrangement of the incidents themselves (Charter 1003,
1009). Charters defines plot as “the sequence of events in a story and
their relation to one another as they develop and usually resolve a
conflict”(1003). The sequences within this story are quite short
because this story occurs in the course of a single hour. The conflict
present in this story is all within the protagonist, “the main character
of [the] narrative” (Charters 1051). Without the view which allows the
reader to see inside the mind of Mrs. Mallard, the reader would not be
aware of the true conflict. Without this insight, a reader might assume,
like Mrs. Mallard’s sister, that the conflict of the wife was the grief
associated with her husband’s death (Chopin 158). The point of view
allows the reader to see the true conflict within the plot and to sense
the freedom that is eventually embraced by the protagonist (Chopin 158).

The life of
the author seems to have an impact on the plot. Kate Chopin had a very
similar experience as Mrs. Mallard in the tragic death of her father.
Chopin’s father perished when she was young in a train accident (Chopin
157; and “Katherine Chopin”). Also, she did not begin writing until after her
mother and husband had both passed away (“Katherine Chopin”). She herself
stated that “If it were possible for my husband and my mother to come
back to earth, I feel that I would unhesitatingly give up every thing
that has come into my life since they left it and join my existence
again with theirs. To do that, I would have to forget the past ten years
of my growth -- my real growth” (O'Brien). This suggests Chopin
sympathized with Mrs. Mallard, who had found new freedom in the death of
a loved one (Chopin 158). Kate Chopin had a bicultural background.
According to Contemporary Authors, this author’s
great-grandmother related stories of her ancestors, including those
about “notorious infidels” (“Katherine Chopin”). This may have given Chopin
confidence to explore topics not generally discussed by the society of
her day.

The plot
itself has some very distinct characteristics that are of the literary
realism genre. First, it is believable. Most people believe that heart
disease and train accidents do exist (Chopin 157). Authors writing
within this style often chose to look at the nature of human beings
(Agatucci 3). The entire plot of “Story of An Hour” is that of
describing the nature of the characters. The plot begins by depicting
the reaction of Mrs. Mallard’s sister and Mr. Mallard’s friend (Chopin
157). The evolution of the emotional nature of Mrs. Mallard is
described as she sits alone (Chopin157-158). Finally, we see the nature
of society at that time, totally ignorant of the true feelings felt by
the wife about her husband. Agatucci describes this impact on
characters such as Mrs. Mallard as “ordinary people of contemporary
times live it in society, caught up by social…forces” (3).

The
social forces of this time included, what could be referred to as
society’s “repression” of women. Seyersted describes
this time period as a society in which “a society where man makes the
rules, woman is often kept in a state of tutelage and regarded as
property or as a servant”. Seyersted quotes Chopin herself in saying,
“As Mme. de Stael's Corinne is told: Whatever extraordinary gifts she
may have, her duty and ‘her proper destiny is to devote herself to her
husband and to the raising of her children’.” This type of society had
a great impact on the plot of this story. The reader can better
understand the situation of Mrs. Mallard. Her destiny was that of
devoting herself to her husband. Even though she loved him and would
weep upon seeing him dead, she welcomed the “procession of years that
would belong to her absolutely” (Chopin 158). Maureen Anderson refers
to Chopin as having an “authorial skill through which she elegantly
addresses society's flaws” present in all her works.

In conclusion,
both the point of view and the plot of “Story of an Hour” work to create
the theme of this story. Theme is “a generalization about the meaning
of a story” (Charters 1013). The theme of Chopin’s story is how
ignorant society was at that time of the true feelings experienced by
repressed women. First, the point of view allows us to see the inner
emotions expressed by Mrs. Mallard. Without a speaker with limited
omniscience, a reader would never realize what was truly being felt by
the protagonist, and the theme would be lost. Because the narrator is
outside the story and could be considered more objective, the reader is
more likely to believe that these feelings experienced by Mrs. Mallard
are true. If Mrs. Mallard or the sister had told the story, readers
would have gotten two different, biased accounts. The point of view
allows a reader to feel that this really could have happened, an
“illusion of life”, thereby making the theme more powerful. The plot
allows Mrs. Mallard to explore her feelings of repression and finally
accept the fact that she can rejoice in the freedom of being a widow
(Chopin 158). The surprise ending, the return of Mr. Mallard and the
death of Mrs. Mallard, gives the reader a chance to understand the
ironic beliefs of society (Chopin 158). The irony can be seen in the
totally contradictory feelings of the protagonist and society. Mrs.
Mallard, upon seeing her husband alive, was suddenly thrown back into a
situation in which she had “thought with a shudder that life might be
long” (Chopin 158). It was this great shock and grief that led
to her death, not the “joy that kills” (Chopin 158).

Charters, Ann. “Appendix 3: The Elements of Fiction.” The Story and Its
Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Compact 6th
Edition. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003. 1003-1015.

Chopin, Kate. “The Story of an Hour”. [First published 1894.] Rpt. The
Story and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed. Ann
Charters. Compact 6th Edition. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s,
2003. 157-158.

One of Guy De
Maupassant's literary
influences was Gustave
Flaubert, who taught him to
write. Flaubert's teaching
principles suggested that
the "writer must look at
everything to find some
aspect of it that no one has
yet seen or expressed," thus
providing the reader a new
or different view of life
(Charters, "Maupassant"
header 523). Maupassant
succeeded in being a writer
"who had entered into
himself and looked out upon
life through his own being
and with his own eyes,"
according to Kate Chopin
(861). He wrote "realistic
fiction" and greatly
influences writers still
(Charters, "Brief History"
998). "The Necklace"
was written in the 19th
century Literary Realism
period. The story focuses on
"everyday events, lives,
[and the] relationships of
middle/lower class," and it
provides a glimpse of normal
people and how they are
influenced by "social and
economic forces" (Agatucci
4).

The meaning of "The
Necklace" is
developed through the
depiction of the characters
and the plot of the story.
Maupassant stated that the
story is not only a form of
entertainment but a tool "to
make us think and to make us
understand the deep and
hidden meaning of events"
("Writer's" 896). I found
that the theme of "The
Necklace" exhibits the
importance of honesty and
being happy with who you
are. It shows that things
are not always what they
seem, material things do not
define the person and that
money cannot solve all
problems and may in fact
create them. Donald Adamson
describes the main
character, Mathilde, as a
"poor but an honest woman,"
I disagree with his opinion.
Mathilde's dishonesty
changes her life and forces
her to know "the horrible
existence of the needy"
(Maupassant 528). "The
Necklace"is a story
about Mathilde, a miserable
and selfish wife of a
"little clerk" who suffers
"from the poverty of her
dwelling," and dreams of a
rich and elegant lifestyle
where she is beautiful and
"envied" (Maupassant,
"Necklace", 524). This
conflict within Mathilde
drives her throughout the
story. Her dedicated
husband, M. Loisel, is
content with their life and
wishes to make her happy
despite everything he must
endure. After obtaining an
invitation to a ball that
was an "awful trouble to
get," he eagerly takes it
home to his wife who is
ungrateful because she does
not feel that she has
anything suitable to wear
(525). After having a new
dress made, Mathilde can't
imagine going to the ball
without "a single jewel" so
she borrows a beautiful
necklace from her friend
Mme. Forestier (526). The
day of the ball proved to be
everything Mathilde
imagined, but it all ends
when she loses the necklace.
Although M. Loisel and
Mathilde find a replacement
necklace, they spend "ten
years in grinding poverty
until they finally paid off
their debt," only to
discover that the necklace
was not a diamond necklace
but just "mere costume
jewellery" (Adamson).

Charters defines plot as the
"sequence of events in a
story and their relation to
one another as they develop
and usually resolve a
conflict" ("Elements" 1003).
In the exposition of "The
Necklace," Maupassant
provides a detailed
"character portrait" of
Mathilde and offers some
important details about M.
Loisel (Adamson). It is
obvious that conflict exists
inside of Mathilde. She
feels she is too good for
the life she leads. She is
unhappy with who she is and
dreams of being someone
else. On the contrary, M.
Loisel is happy and
satisfied to come home to
his wife who prepares him an
"economical but tasty meal"
(Smith). Mathilde is very
materialistic and believes
that riches would end her
suffering, she won't even
visit a rich friend and
"former classmate at the
convent" because she is so
jealous and envious.

The rising action of the
plot begins when M. Loisel
presents the invitation to
Mathilde. This presentation
only aggravates the conflict
that exists within Mathilde
and she cannot imagine going
to the ball in any of her
old dresses. Mathilde sheds
two pitiful tears and M.
Loisel "quickly decides to
sacrifice his savings" so
that she may purchase a new
dress (Smith). Mathilde is
not satisfied with just a
new dress! She believes it
would be a disgrace to show
up at the ball without
jewelry. She must not "look
poor among other women who
are rich" (Maupassant 526).
So she borrows a "superb
necklace of diamonds" from
Mme. Forestier (526). In
this passage Maupassant
convinces the reader that
the necklace is real
diamonds; "he misleads the
reader into believing that
the necklace really is
valuable" (Adamson). This
creates more excitement for
the climax of the story when
Mathilde loses the necklace
on her way home from the
ball. M. Loisel responds by
going to search for the
necklace to no avail. He
does not find the necklace
and instructs Mathilde to
lie to Mme. Forestier and
tell her that she has broken
the necklace and will need
time to have it repaired. If
Mathilde would have chosen
to be honest at this point,
Mme. Forestier would have
told her that the necklace
was only "paste…worth at
most five hundred francs"
(530). Instead they find a
suitable replacement
necklace that costs
thirty-six thousand francs.
After one week M. Loisel
"had aged five years," and
was forced to use his
inheritance and borrow money
"risking his signature
without even knowing if he
could meet it" to buy the
replacement necklace
(Maupassant, "Necklace"
528). Upon returning the
necklace to her friend,
Mathilde discovered the
"horrible existence of the
needy" (528). They
"dismissed their servant"
and gave up their flat.
Mathilde became a "woman of
impoverished households -
strong and hard and rough"
(529). She was forced to
haggle and defend their
"miserable money" (529). It
took them ten years to pay
off all of their debts.
Mathilde was no longer
pretty and charming, she now
had "frowsy hair… and red
hands" (529).

These trials and
tribulations represent the
falling action of the story,
where the conflict is moving
toward a resolution
(Charters, "Elements" 1005).
Guy De Maupassant's narrator
and Donald Adamson use the
term hero when describing
Mme. Loisel, but I do not
feel that her actions were
heroic. She was just
fulfilling the duties that
were always expected of her,
but that she felt she was
too good for. I do not
believe that dishonesty is a
trait of a hero. Perhaps if
Mathilde would have been
honest with Mme. Forestier
from the beginning about
losing the necklace, she
would have explained that it
was not real diamonds and
they could have avoided all
of the hardships they
endured. Some may argue that
Mathilde was heroic because
she took responsibility for
her mistake, gave up her
lifestyle and worked to
repay the debt. It was
admirable that she did not
expect her husband to bear
the burden alone. The
conclusion of "The Necklace"undoubtedly contains an
element of surprise.
Mathilde discovers that the
necklace was not made of
diamonds, but imitation
gems. This devastating
discovery leaves many
unanswered questions.

Maupassant's narrator uses
limited omniscient narration
by describing Mathilde with
her thoughts. She is a round
character capable of
choosing alternative
responses to the situations
presented to her (Charters,
"Elements" 1007). I believe
Mathilde is both a dynamic
and a static character. She
is dynamic because she does
undergo a significant change
and takes on the duties of a
poverty stricken housewife.
Yet she remains static in
that she is still not
content with her life and
dreams of that "gay evening
long ago, of that ball where
she had been so beautiful"
(Maupassant, "Necklace"
529). Her husband M. Loisel
is also a round character,
the "play and pull of his
actions and responses to
situations" could be
observed throughout the
story (Charters, "Elements"
1007). When Mathilde is
unhappy with the invitation
to the ball he offers to buy
her a new dress. When she
wants jewelry he recommends
borrowing from Mme.
Forestier and when she loses
the necklace he collects the
money to replace it.
Although M. Loisel does
experience some change, he
is a static character. I
believe he is content and
happy with his life
throughout the story. He
continues to work hard and
stays dedicated to Mathilde.
The themes of "The Necklace"are evident throughout
the plot of the story. If
only Mathilde would have
been honest with Mme.
Forestier and happy with who
she was, she could have
prevented the whole ordeal.
Her misfortune proves to the
reader that honesty is the
best choice. Maupassant
warns the reader of the
afflictions that vanity may
cause. There was no need for
Mathilde to wear a diamond
necklace; she was too
concerned about what others
would think of her. The fake
diamond necklace proves that
things are not always what
they seem, although Mme.
Forestier appeared to be
rich, she chose or may have
only been able to afford
costume jewelry. I believe
"The Necklace" serves as a
reminder of the importance
of being happy and proud of
who we are regardless of the
amount of material things or
money that we possess.

The Yellow
Wallpaper,
written by Charlotte
Perkins Gilman, is a story
of a young depressed
woman, traveling to the
country with her husband,
so that she can be away
from writing, which seems
to have a bad impact on
her psychological
condition. Sandra Gilbert
and Susan Gubar call it ”a
striking story of female
confinement and escape, a
paradigmatic tale which
(like Jane Eyre)
seems to tell the
story that all literary
women would tell if they
could speak their
‘speechless woe’” (874).
In this story theme and
point of view interlace
and work together to
create an intense
description of an almost
prison-like prescription
for overcoming depression.
She struggles with male
oppression, because she is
told by her husband and
her brother many things
about her own health that
she disagrees with. She
strives for independence,
and she wants to break
free from the bondages of
that oppression. The story
is written from the
character’s point of view
in a form resembling
journal entries, which
describe her stay in the
house. The house itself is
an old mansion, and the
yellow wallpaper in the
character’s bedroom seems
to be really disturbing.
She believes that there is
a woman locked behind bars
living in the pattern of
that wallpaper. She spends
a lot of time trying to
figure it out, and in the
end she completely breaks
away even from her own
mind.
Ann Charters
defines theme as the
“generalization about the
meaning of a story”
(1013). The theme in
The Yellow Wallpaper
describes the struggle of
women to live in a
male-dominated society.
Gilman portrays the man as
insensitive and lacking in
emotional support. From
the beginning of the story
forward the narrator
speaks of how her husband
and other men in her life
direct her so that she
will recover quickly. The
narrator shows that even
though she is convinced
that she knows what to do
about her depression, she
is still influenced by her
husband with the following
passage: "I sometimes
fancy that in my condition
if I had less opposition
and more society and
stimulus – but John says
the very worst thing I can
do is to think about my
condition, and I confess
it always makes me feel
bad" (306). Her husband
seems to be the one who
can change her thoughts
because he is a man or
because he is her husband.
Nonetheless, she is still
being suppressed by a
member of the opposite
sex. Many times the
narrator also speaks in a
way that suggests that
because a man speaks she
has no means by which to
disagree with him because
she is a woman. A perfect
example of this is
presented in the beginning
passages of the story,
where the narrator states,
"Personally, I disagree
with their ideas.
Personally, I believe that
congenial work, with
excitement and change,
would do me good. But what
is one to do?" (306). This
last sentence "But what is
one to do?" exemplifies
wonderfully her oppressed
female stature in the
society of her life. She
states right from the
beginning that "John is a
physician, and perhaps -
(I would not say it to a
living soul, of course,
but this is dead paper and
a great relief to my mind)
- perhaps that is the one
reason I do not get well
faster" (306). She
obviously loves her
husband and trusts him but
has some underlying
feeling that maybe his
prescription of total bed
rest is not working for
her. In the second passage
the narrator becomes
comfortable with the room,
now she likes the room
enough and is curious
enough to open up to her
husband and tell him what
she thinks she has been
seeing. John becomes
terrified of these ideas
she has in her head and
what she might believe to
be real and not real. He
begins to plead with her
and tries to convince her
that she must control all
of her ambitions and act
sanely. Later John is
trying to manipulate the
narrator with guilt. He is
implying that she must
think of herself as
getting better, mind and
body, for the sake of
other people, rather than
herself. The narrator is,
however, doubting that she
will ever recover
mentally. Although John
says her appearance has
improved, she believes
that she is not physically
better. The final passages
of the story, at last,
successfully manifest a
display of power and
possible regain of
self-governance through
the narrator's finally
standing up to her husband
by locking him out of the
room in which he has
imprisoned her supposedly
for her benefit.
Whereupon, for the first
time in the story, he must
listen to her entreaties
to discover where the key
is hidden (317).
According to
Charters, point of view is
“the author’s choice of a
narrator for the story”
(1009). In this story the
narrator is a first person
narrator. We can easily
see what is going on the
head of the main
character. We can feel
sorry for her because she
is a victim of male
oppression. However, we
are presented with a
biased story. We can only
see the events that take
place from her point of
view, which turns out to
be quite distorted. She
stares at this wallpaper
for hours on end and
thinks she sees a woman
behind the paper. "I
didn't realize for a long
time what the thing was
that showed behind, that
dim sub-pattern, but now I
am quite sure it is a
woman" (313). She becomes
obsessed with discovering
what is behind that
pattern and what it is
doing. "I don't want to
leave now until I have
found it out" (314). Once
the narrator determines
that the image is in fact
a woman struggling to
become free, she somehow
aligns herself with the
woman. We don’t see that
until she mentions that
she often sees the woman
creeping outside: "I see
her in that long shaded
lane, creeping up and
down. I see her in those
dark grape arbors,
creeping all around the
garden.... I don't blame
her a bit. It must be very
humiliating to be caught
creeping by daylight! I
always lock the door when
I creep by daylight. I
can't do it at night, for
I know John would suspect
something at once" (315).
This shows the narrator
seeing herself in the
woman and when she sees
the woman creeping
outside, she sees herself.
When she creeps outside
she locks the door. She is
afraid her husband will
take away the only comfort
she has. She continues to
pursue this obsessive idea
that she has to get the
woman out. The narrator
wants the woman to be free
of the paper but does not
want to let her go,
because the woman is what
keeps her focused and
sane: "I don't want to go
out, and I don't want to
have anybody come in, till
John comes. I want to
astonish him. I've got a
rope up here that even
Jennie did not find. If
that woman does get out,
and tries to get away, I
can tie her!" (317). She
peels all the wallpaper
that she can reach. She
wants to help the woman
get out, and she becomes
quite extreme: "I am
getting angry enough to do
something desperate. To
jump out of the window
would be admirable
exercise, but the bars are
too strong even to try.
Besides I wouldn't do it.
Of course not. I know well
enough that a step like
that is improper and might
be misconstrued" (317).
She goes on to say, "I
don't like to look out of
the windows even--there
are so many those creeping
women, and they creep so
fast. I wonder if they all
come out of that wallpaper
as I did?” (317). It seems
she has released the woman
and it is indeed herself.
As if she enjoys being out
and doing as she likes but
at night her husband will
be around and she mustn't
creep around her husband.
He might find her mad. But
at last she finds the
courage to confront her
oppressor and stand up for
herself. "'What is the
matter?' he cried. 'For
God's sake, what are you
doing!' I kept on creeping
just the same, but I
looked at him over my
shoulder. 'I've got out at
last,' said I, 'in spite
of you and Jane. And I've
pulled off most of the
paper, so you can't put me
back!'” (318). Jane is
undoubtedly the narrator
herself. She is the result
of a distorted mind trying
to free herself from the
male oppression. From the
narrator’s point of view
we had this fact hidden
throughout the story.
However, as soon as her
mind has freed itself, she
had freed herself both
from her husband and from
her own identity.
In order to read
and understand this story,
we must consider many
things. First the time
frame in which the story
was written, and that
society's attitude of the
story content at that
time. Written in 1892, a
woman suffering from
depression was not clearly
understood and was treated
with isolation. This would
clearly drive any person
mad. The narrator made
attempts to bring to her
husband's attention what
she felt was a better way
of making her better but
he refused to listen and
ignored her wishes to
involve herself in more
activity. This was the
experience of Gilman
herself. She shares that
she wrote The Yellow
Wallpaper “to save
people from being crazy”
(879).

Works Cited

Charters, Ann. “The Elements of Fiction”. The Story
and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Compact 6th
ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003. 1003 – 1015.

HIDDEN LABYRINTH

To complete a puzzle properly each
and every piece must be accounted for; otherwise the final product is
never comprehensive. A puzzle with missing pieces is very much like a
story with missing elements. Every element plays an important role in
the meaning and the integrity of the story. Clearly, with a puzzle
there are pieces that are more consequential if missing than others.
Just like a puzzle there are significant elements in a story that make a
big difference. If such elements are removed some of the realistic
aspects a story needs for readers to be able to relate are missing as
well. Although there are many elements that go into a story there are
two that are profoundly important to have in a story. These two
elements are recognized as the plot and characters.

A plot can be described as the
“sequence of events in a story and there relation to one another as they
develop and usually resolve a conflict” (Charters, “Elements” 1003). It
is usually desirable for the author to present the plot in the beginning
of the story, laid out so readers can easily follow the events and their
significance (Charters, “Elements” 1003). The conflict within the story
is profoundly important to how the plot is going to be laid out since
the plot itself is usually impacted by the conflict throughout the
story. This point can be seen in Maupassant’s “The Necklace” extremely
well.

In the beginning of the
story “The Necklace” Maupassant lays out the foundation of the conflict
for his readers. Mme. Loisel is a pretty woman who longs for something
more than she has and she pays for this throughout the story (
Maupassant 524). This internal conflict expands throughout the entire
story. Mme. Loisel wants to be richer but she is married to a clerk and
is far from rich (Maupassant 524). This first conflict illustrated by
Maupassant drives the story very well. The second conflict presented in
“The Necklace” was when the dinner invitation came. This conflict seems
to be more external, because it is not a conflict Mme. Loisel has been
struggling with internally for years. However, when the dinner
invitation is presented another conflict is introduced. Mme. Loisel
wants to attend this elaborate dinner, but not unless she can be in the
most magnificent clothing and jewelry (Maupassant 525). This point is
well illustrated when Mme. Loisel states, “there is nothing more
humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich”
(Maupassant 526). Continuously after these two conflicts are
introduced, she is introduced to more that get her into trouble. Thus
the conflict within the story is driving the plot and consistently
reappearing (Charters, “Elements” 1003).

Within
the plot there are components that are critically important when
exploring a story. These components consist of exposition, rising
action, climax, falling action and conclusion (Charters, “Elements”
1004-1005). Exposition includes the “introduction of characters, scene,
time, and situation (Charters, “Elements” 1004). In “The Necklace” the
exposition seemed to be in the beginning when the introduction of Mme.
Loisel is taking place. At this point the author gives only a brief
background of the past and present dimensions of her life (Maupassant
524). The rising action of a story is generally “the dramatization of
events that complicate the situation and gradually intensify the
conflict” (Charters, “Elements” 1005). In “The Necklace” this point
would be when the couple is invited to the dinner party the reader can
not tell at this point that the invitation is significant but it is
(Maupassant 525). The climax can basically be described as the “turning
point” in the story (Charters, “Elements” 1005). The climax is this
particular story would surely be when Mme. Loisel discovers her necklace
as missing (Maupassant 527). The falling action moves the conflict
towards a solution (Charters, “Elements” 1005). In Mme. Loisel’s case
this would be when she sees her friend Mme. Forestier on the street and
confronts her. Once the conclusion sets in and ties together all the
loose strings, the reader get the surprise that the necklace was fake
the entire time (Maupassant 530). As one can see the plot plays a huge
role in the development of a short story.

Another
important aspect of developing a short story is the character developed
in the context of the story. It is important that characters be
realistic in any story. Writers can accomplish the task of reality by
making the characters either dynamic or static (Charters, “Elements”
1007). A static character is one that does not change throughout the
story, while a dynamic character changes. Mme. Loisel is both a static
and dynamic character. Mme. Loisel changes when the necklace disappears
making her dynamic. This is true in the beginning she is from lower
middle class where she has a comfortable home and servants (Maupassant
524). However, when the necklace disappears and must be replaced, she
is forced to release her servants and change her lodging in order to pay
off her debts. This change in Mme. Loisel is permanent thus making her
a dynamic character (Maupassant 528).

It is
also easy for one to see Mme. Loisel as a static character also. This
is due to the fact that Mme. Loisel never really changes in some
aspects. Throughout the entire story she is envious of other people.
One can see this at the beginning of the story with the introduction of
the invitation. At this point Mme. Loisel insists on an expensive
dress and necklace (Maupassant 525-526). It can also be seen at the end
of the story when Mme. Loisel sees her friend Jeanne again for the first
time in awhile and is still envious of her wealth and beauty. This
aspect of Mme. Loisel’s character also makes her static (Maupassant
529-530). One can see how the plot and characters’ play an important
role together in shaping the story and laying it out for the reader to
understand. The plot helps to set the conflict, which in turn drives
the plot as well as characters actions and motives.

As an
author, having the ability to integrate such important elements of a
story successfully can be very difficult. Guy De Maupassant was not a
naturally gifted writer, which makes the morals and outline of his
stories even more believable (Charters, “Guy De” 523). Maupassant had
difficulties in school while he was younger, which may explain why he
joined the army during the 1870-71 Franco-Prussian War (Charters, “Guy
De” 523). Maupassant was later taught how to write by a relative of the
name Gustave Flaubert. Maupassant recalled writing, “verses, short
stories, longer stories, even a wretched play. Nothing survived. The
master read everything” (Charters, “Guy De” 523). It seemed that
Maupassant was not a natural talent when it came to writing, which makes
his writing meaningful because he must have struggled to write well and
overcame the challenge. Flaubert instructed Maupassant that “talent is
nothing other than a long patience. Work” (Charters, “Guy De” 523).
This may be an important aspect of Maupassant’s life to examine.
Maupassant writings seem to be packed with morals and hidden messages
possibly due to lessons installed by Flaubert.

Another
important lesson Flaubert tried to install in his pupil was to look at
everything within the context of any literary work and discover the one
component that every other reader has missed. Flaubert explained the
fact that every piece has some hidden labyrinth or message unexplored
(Charters, “Guy De” 523). The lessons installed in Maupassant by
Flaubert may be a large factor in the way he wrote. Since Flaubert
focused so much on details and hidden unexplored messages, it is easy to
see why there are so many subtle clues in “The Necklace” that readers
can discover and interpret as they wish.

Another
important influence on Maupassant’s writing may simply be the era he was
living in while he composed his stories. Ann Charters explains that
“Maupassant’s plots are tightly organized and usually conclude with a
decisive action” (Charters, “Brief History” 998). Maupassant plays
close attention to physical and mental details. As a writer he favors a
surprise ending, as one can tell by the ending of “The Necklace”
(Charters, Brief History 998). Maupassant’s literary era could be
classified primarily as 19th Century Literary Realism
(Agatucci 3). This period of literature involved real people with
everyday events in which ordinary people could relate. Also this period
places a large importance on classes and relationships between upper and
lower classes, which is what Maupassant does extremely well (Agatucci
3).

Maupassant is an
exceptional writer and as explained in her essay “How I Stumbled upon
Maupassant,” Kate Chopin explains how readers may not realize just how
wonderful he is until they truly understand him. Kate Chopin explains
her findings of Maupassant’s writing as somewhat of an inspiration.
Chopin believes that his writings do not speak to everyone as a group
but to each reader individually, by what the reader sees and hears
within the pages (Chopin 861). Chopin describes Maupassant “as a man
who escaped from tradition and authority, who had entered into himself
and look out upon life through his own being” (Chopin 861).

It is
almost as if Chopin found herself as a writer when she began to study
Maupassant’s work. Also she sees him as secretly telling hints of his
stories within the pages. Maupassant does not just come out and explain
the important hidden messages within his stories; he expresses them
through the feelings each reader experiences while reading his
literature (Chopin 861).

It takes many
special components to write a story. Maupassant had the opportunity to
show his readers the elegance of his writing. Maupassant had a gift at
combining elements of fiction like characters and plot. Through the
combination of his history, era and hard work he developed stories
literature readers could enjoy and relate to for generations.

[Untitled: On Chekhov's "The
Lady with the Little Dog"]

Anton
Chekov is said to “ [to be] extremely modest about his extraordinary
ability to empathize with the characters” that he wrote about in his
stories (Charters, 134). He was careful not stereotype any of the
characters he portrayed nor did he over dramatize the story’s plot. The
characters emotions and reactions to those emotions were the vehicle for
the stories plot. Chekov’s only desired to write about real people with
real feelings which allowed his writings such as “The Lady with the
Little Dog”, the seriousness and sympathy it deserves. Chekov emphasized
on the man and the woman always being “ the two pole [of every story]
(p. 949). Just as there are pulls toward poles of the earth so are the
pulls on the characters in his stories; these pulls being forces of life
and life circumstance. “The Lady with the Little Dog” demonstrates how
reality forces undesired role play between a man and woman in love which
is one of the definitive of literary realism established by Professor
Agatucci; “[The Lady with the Little Dog] is an example of “A slice of
life” such as ordinary people of contemporary times live in society
caught up by social forces” (p. 3). The story’s main characters, Anna
and Dimitri, their desire to be together are conflicted with the duties
they have in common which are husband and wife to two different people.
However, the love that Dimitri and Anna share represents the struggle of
duties just as the desire for most people in society to want to break
from reality.

Dimitri,
unlike Anna, was not upset or regretful of their love affair because “he
had begun to be unfaithful to [his wife] long ago, was unfaithful often,
and, probably for that reason, almost always spoke ill of women, and
when they were discussed in his presence, he would say of them: ‘An
inferior race!’”(p.144). Dimitri was introduced in the story as taking
on an egotistical and selfish role knowing very well that not only was
he beyond so many years to Anna but also, “in his tone and caresses,
there has been a slight shade of mockery, the somewhat coarse arrogance
of a happy man” (p. 149). He seemed to have had his way with Anna and
did not want to fall short of this good thing. In contrast, Anna
responded in way that she was new to being unfaithful to her husband and
maybe even realized that she was not Dimitri’s first mistress. She
admits, “ I love an honest man, pure life, sin is vile to me, I myself
don’t know what I’m doing”(p. 147). Anna knew right from the first day
she met Dimitri that she loved him but those feelings over powered her
judgment and duty to her husband. She could only try to justify that
this was not real love that they shared but a scandalous and
un-righteous thing to be apart of.

Anna and
Dimitri are considered to be dynamic characters because not only to do
they change the way they feel about each other but they also change the
way they feel about their life circumstances. Moreover, are also
considered to be well-rounded characters encompassing the substance of
the story Chekov intended. Dimitir’s wife is only mentioned a few times
and is considered to be a flat character because we do not get a sense
for how she reacts to Dimitri’s scandalous love affairs. However, we do
have Dimitri’s point of view of her to be a woman “who loved without
sincerity, with superfluous talk, affectedly, with hysteria, with an
expression as if it were not passion” (p. 146). He obviously had a very
superficial relationship with his wife that only made him compare his
happiness and love with Anna. Anna followed Dimitri everywhere, he
could hear her breathing and saw resemblances of her in the oddest of
places (p.150). His life back home was boring and uninteresting to
him. He only became so appreciative by Anna’s beauty and the excitement
that he gave him when she was away. Meanwhile, Chekov did not explain
to us the process by which she changed in her character however, Anna
admitted that she adored him and he was all that she could think about.
She realized her triteness before when she tried thought that she was
just a “trashy woman”(p.147).

Dimitri’s
desire to find Anna after many years of being in Moscow is considered to
be an important turning point in the story. Dimitri forfeits his
strength that he could live without her because his emotions were too
high strung and he valued being with her too intensely. After meeting
up with Anna at the Geisha, he was able to test Anna and wait for
her to reveal her true feeling so that he was not just imaging she was
in love with him. And so the climax begins, Anna reveals, “ I think
only of you all the time, I’ve lived with only thoughts of you.”
Furthermore, the falling action of the story is the plan of continued
rendezvous’ in Moscow secretly. He and Anna “loved each other like very
close dear people, like husband and wife, like tender friends; it seemed
to them that fate itself had destined them for each other, and they
could not understand why he had a wife and she a husband” (p. 155).
They were bound like soul mates and did want to live the false lives
they had with people they were not in love with. So they knew that
their problems were far from few and “ the most complicated and
difficult part was just beginning” (p. 155). The conclusion of a “happy
ending” is left by the reader to implore because Chekov left it open
with a purpose. The purpose was to leave it less dramatic and
predictable.

The love that
these two people shared simplified the term “ love is pain” but more
importantly they finally found each other and they did not have to live
in falsity. This true love was a new and treacherous territory that
they did not want to avoid. The willingness they had caused them to want
to break away from the roles that bound them for such a long time.
Chekov showed transformation and humbleness of the characters in “The
Lady with the Little Dog” and is a story that many could appeal to
because of its deepest emotional level between the characters of Anna
and Dimitri.

Carver, Raymond. “The
Ashtray.”[First published 1984] Rpt. The Story and Its Writer: An
Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed. Ann Charters. Compact 6th
ed. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martins, 2003. 949.

Chekov, Anton. “ The Lady with
the Little Dog.” [First published 1899]. Rpt. The Story and Its Writer: An
Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed. Ann Charter. Compact 6th
ed. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s 2003. 143-155.

Ford, Richard. “ Why We Like
Chekov”. [First published 1998] Rpt. The Story and Its Writer: An
Introduction to Short Story Fiction. Ed. Ann Charters. Compact 6th
ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003. 869-873.